In PS4 there is only ONE guild who wins every time.
They are extremely good players, well organized, have the highest guild score by almost double, and have been around longer than any other guild. They’ve acquired the best players for years and are incredible at GWs.
There is simply no way to beat them if you have one member who misses one battle, let alone one full day. Missing a player? NO chance.
Top 27 scores would make them harder to beat because they’re losing their three bottom scores which are likely in the 50-52k range, so this implementation isn’t a selfish ploy to finally beat them.
However, it gives everybody else a CHANCE. The main reason nobody can beat them is because every other guild has rage quitters, vacationers, people who go AFK, and whatever else.
If top 27 were implemented the end result will be much, much closer, and will give multiple guilds a chance at taking first instead of the same one getting it every single time, even though the probability of beating them is still very slim. It gives a small chance even if you’re down a player or two, when currently there isn’t a remote opportunity to do so.
Yeah vacations and such I think.
But, when I went on vacation to Australia to marry and fly back with my aussie wife, loyal guild mate @Rickygervais played my GW battles back when it was weekly. And I brought him back some cool souvenirs. I planned ahead of time because GW is important, it’s still important, and I savor every victory.
We try to do the same, and it works very well for the most part, but every now and then we run into the problem of being down a man.
So many times I’ve seen the roster list during GW of one of my competitors at 29/30 and I immediately knew that they were out of contention. It shouldn’t be that way, regardless of the reason for being down a member. Even if I know MY guild has the advantage over others, it’s just not competitive. You have to look at it from a broader perspective.
Because everyone’s score should count whether 57k 22k or 0, its also an unknown variable that a weaker guild with 30 may stand a chance vrs a stronger guild of 28 due to absence,power failure…Etc.For example my guild has a revolving door at the bottom of the roster we made bracket 1 last gw with an almost full roster.During our week of B1 we had 3 inactive for the week and we obviously lost,your 27 player system would not make a difference there.
It’s meant to be 30 v 30 if your bus only shows up with 27 players on the team its not the games fault
You even said yourself in a previous post that it effected your guild in the exact way we’ve been describing.
You were only able to attain B1 because you had a full team, but dropped back because you were down 3 players. If every other team score was based on 27, like your guild was, you may not have dropped, and wouldn’t have started with a 130-150k deficit.
We were at 28 active when we finished 12th prior to making b1 so again not a full guild.Your system may or may not have helped but we took the loss,and will be back out next gw to try again for b1.
But ill still support the current system in place.
I think you’re misinterpreting something here, as being down 3 players would not have effected your scores if the rest of the guilds’ scores were based on the top 27. If you dropped a bracket, it would have been due to lower scores among your 27 players, not because you were missing players.
It absolutely, 100%, would have helped you because you wouldn’t have been immediately put out of contention for missing a player.
Sorry, I didn’t read it correctly the first time, I thought you said you took first with a full team. My mistake. You took second place the previous GW and went up a bracket, but you were unable to achieve first place because you were down two players. We don’t know how many of the other guilds were missing players or how many players they were missing that week, but the fact that you were able to achieve 2nd place in that bracket while being down two players suggests that other guilds were experiencing the same or worse issues.
You inadvertently made a perfect case for this scoring system to be implemented, but it seems you want to just oppose it for personal reasons as you said earlier, you’re pissed at one of my members for 'poaching".
Earlier I asked for examples on why a “3 player cushion” wouldn’t help or how discarding 3 outliers could be detrimental to evening the playing field. You seem to have forgotten to address those questions? Could you please explain that to me? What are the drawbacks to implementing this system, and why are you part of the 24% of the player base who supports the current scoring system?
Players 1-26 each got a score of 50k.
Player 27-30 each got 48k.
Total of 1,492,000
Guild B:
Players 1-26 each got a score of 50k.
Player 27 got 49k.
Players 28-30 each got 30k
Total of 1,439,000
You have no qualms about declaring guild B the winner by “equalizing” the playing field with your top 27 scores? Even though guild A demonstrated higher skill & better teamwork?
I can accept losing because I was remiss in securing 30 good players. I can accept losing because someone bails in the middle of the week. I cannot accept losing because of a systemic “drawback” that could have been prevented.
Players 1-26 each got a score of 50k
Players 27-29 each got 48k
Total of 1,444,000
Guild B:
Players 1-26 each got a score of 50k
Player 27 got 49k
Players 28-30 each got 32k
Total of 1,445,000
Let’s assume you’re in Guild A. You may be ok with losing because you’re at an uncontrollable disadvantage, but how about the other 28 players in your guild? This isn’t about individuals, it’s about the team.
Do you lead a guild? If so, how do your players feel? All 28 other members would feel that their efforts should be negated and penalized because of one person?
The point is dropping 3 player scores so the guild doesn’t lose its position in the bracket due to the penalty of an inactive,bug, or low scoring member is what i am talking about. Theres your cushion.Bracket 1 will remain stagnant with the top 8 guilds and the ever revolving door for 9th and 10th spot.
That’s how it actually works… the bottom 2 go to B2.
Who’s to say what guilds will be in the bottom 2 every time? It would be a more even playing field, and every position would be more closely contested. Why should a guild get punished if somebody goes on vacation or has a player maliciously join them with the sole intention of leaving during GW in an attempt to make them drop a bracket?
Top 27 isn’t proposed so a guild “doesn’t lose its position”, it’s to EVEN THE PLAYING FIELD and give a more accurate depiction of skill and teamwork without being immediately penalized for uncontrollable outliers.
If a player goes on vacation get a replacement? As for people maliciously joining to sabotage a gw they can shove a cactus up their ass and use lemon juice as lube.Its always been 30v30 regardless if all play or not and there will never ever be a level playing field in this game.
If a longtime member who has been in the guild for say 500 days goes on vacation, we should just boot them and find a replacement? Then they lose their longevity in the guild and their new timer starts at 0.
What if somebody gets into a car accident and they’re in the hospital? You think it’s their family’s priority to jump on gems and tell the guild leader that this person can’t play Guild Wars this week? Lol!
We can’t control people and there are many players who place alt accounts into guilds with the sole purpose of sabotaging them at GW time to gain an advantage. It happens.
29 vs 30 is not an even playing field.
28 vs 30 is not an even playing field.
27 vs 30 is not an even playing field.
27 vs 27 is an even playing field.
They could bump it to 28 or 29 if too many people feel 27 isn’t fair, but again, 54% of the voting player base thought 25 or 27 was the appropriate number. 76% thought 30 was inappropriate.
It allows for uncontrollable outliers to not be the determining factor.
Thank you for taking the time to bring up this topic again. I was so looking forward to this change being introduced long ago. I don’t know what exactly caused it not to be implemented – perhaps the addition of other guild events – but the headaches that result from not having it are still pervasive, even with today’s less GW-centric schedule.
I personally don’t care for GW, but I can stomach it for one week a month. I just don’t like that it means that I have to be a slave to the game for that one week. Specifically, I cannot be gone that Sunday or my whole guild suffers. Next month, I am leaving for vacation the Friday of GW (sorry GL, this is not the way I wanted to break the news to you ). As a console player, taking my Xbox on the plane with me is not feasible. Even though I trust my GL immensely, I am not about to give my password information to him. And as a member of a high-performing bracket 1 guild, I just can’t burden my guild with the loss of 18,000+ points, so I will have to step out that week. My guild leader will have to find a replacement either for that one week, or (much more likely), the new person will become a permanent member and I will have to wait my turn until another spot opens up, which could take a month or more given the low turnover rate.
No other game mode puts such a high premium on every single member playing every single battle. It’s just not realistic to assume that everybody will be able to play that week, much less that last day of GW. I feel like the people saying that well-organized guilds will find a way are missing the point: yes, the guild may find a replacement, or may even be able to score enough without that player, but the well-meaning player who doesn’t want to put his guild in a bad situation to begin with is, for lack of a better term, screwed.
Devs, please listen to this feedback and implement the change that you hinted at long ago. Late is certainly better than never.
). As a console player, taking my Xbox on the plane with me is not feasible. Even though I trust my GL immensely, I am not about to give my password information to him. And as a member of a high-performing bracket 1 guild, I just can’t burden my guild with the loss of 18,000+ points, so I will have to step out that week. My guild leader will have to find a replacement either for that one week, or (much more likely), the new person will become a permanent member and I will have to wait my turn until another spot opens up, which could take a month or more given the low turnover rate.